Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-02-2017, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,850 posts, read 26,275,432 times
Reputation: 34058

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColoradoOnMyMind View Post
Also, people who hoard multiple rental properties may not like the $500,000 mortgage interest deduction limit, lowering it from $1 million. Rich pay the same rate, get their state tax deductions capped at 10k and mortgage interest deductions capped at 500k. Where they may benefit is lowering the corporate and pass thru rates but rich are hardly a big winner here.

The focus is clearing on the middle class through doubling deductions, increasing child tax credit and lower rates. Also obviously businesses will benefit.
they aren't "doubling deductions" geezus. For 2017 the standard deduction is set at $12,700 and they are increasing it to $24,000 (for married couple) but at the same time they are removing the $4050 personal exemption which you could claim previously even if you itemized.

2017 Tax deductions
married couple $12,700 + $8100 = $20,850.
married couple with 3 kids $12,700 + $20500 = $33,200
senior couple $12,700 + $8100 + $2100 = $22,900

Trump Tax Plan
married couple $24,000
married couple with 3 children $24,000
senior couple $24,000

Add into that the loss of deductions that are significant to many people like student loan interest and medical expenses and you are going to end up with a whole lot of people paying more so that corporations will get a big wet kiss as well as the billionaires who have been paying off politicians for decades in order to get rid of the estate tax.

We're retired and this will cost us roughly $2,000, thanks a lot GOP
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-02-2017, 03:04 PM
 
693 posts, read 357,168 times
Reputation: 395
Upper class:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/20/here...per-class.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 03:05 PM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,734,548 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Your topic backfired on you. The tax bill is a good one. There are no "trillions" going to the rich.

So now you move goal post to talk about state taxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
LOL ok

I've heard it all, now.
WaldoKitty is right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 03:08 PM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,734,548 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilcart View Post
well that is ONLY if you define taxation very narrowly as federal income taxes...

those 'zero" federal tax folks pay FICA on 100% of their wages.

They pay sales tax, gas tax, property tax and all those taxes we all forget about. And those taxes are disproportionately paid by the poor and they come to a trillion (about i don't recall)

so yep they get away with paying federal income tax, but those water/sewer/service taxes can be crushing to lower income families and they can get their property tagged ..

regressive taxation is often not even noticed by the more well off, but can be a big burden on a low income family just trying to hang on.
I've seen people try to use this argument before and it's the stupidest attempt there is. Everyone pays sales tax, gas tax, property tax ... then again, if you're on welfare your paying with someone else's money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 03:08 PM
 
13,685 posts, read 9,009,247 times
Reputation: 10406
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Your topic backfired on you. The tax bill is a good one. There are no "trillions" going to the rich.

So now you move goal post to talk about state taxes.
Since you are knowledgeable about the tax bill, which I have not had time to read or such, perhaps you can answer my prior question:


Does this tax reform bill keep Mr. Trump's promise concerning hedge fund managers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 03:09 PM
 
3,569 posts, read 2,520,942 times
Reputation: 2290
Quote:
Originally Posted by fbernard View Post
Middle class is a range of numbers. 215k is not rich. It's....upper class.

You have poverty level.
You have middle class.
You have upper class.
Then....you have...rich, wealthy, etc.

You don't jump from middle class to rich, while skipping upper class.

And it's not just me saying this. Look it up. There's plenty of data out there all saying the same thing. Again, americans making a household combined of over 250k represents LESS than 4% of all americans. That is not "middle" class. That's upper class.

If you believe you need over 150k to see yourself as being in the "lower" end of middle class, then you're living in an area that really is not.....middle class. If over 10k a month take home pay is something you consider to be "not enough", then you're not middle class. You can live in a million dollar home with that kind of cash and still have plenty left over.
Your argument, taking a logical course, would result in nearly all Americans being "upper class" because, from the standpoint of the world, less than 10% lives on $50+ daily. So you think nearly all Americans are "upper class"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 03:11 PM
 
693 posts, read 357,168 times
Reputation: 395
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
WaldoKitty is right.
No, he's not. It is a tax.

Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA): What Is This Tax - MONEY


Saying it's a "forced savings plan" is just spinning what it is. That's like saying our federal taxes collected are not really a tax...but rather a "forced military fund".


It's a tax. Period.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 03:11 PM
 
2,212 posts, read 1,074,171 times
Reputation: 1381
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
I've seen people try to use this argument before and it's the stupidest attempt there is. Everyone pays sales tax, gas tax, property tax ... then again, if you're on welfare your paying with someone else's money.
But they don't all go into the same coffers. City, county, state, federal. Everyone wants their piece of the pie only their pieces are getting bigger and bigger and they don't take into account the other entities also taking taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 03:11 PM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,734,548 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Yes, up to 35%, but it is convoluted where the % depends on amounts etc. With many deductions gone, many S-Corps will end up paying more than before. Time will tell.
LOL, still not link. I showed you how it can be different for different small business owners but all you want to do is repeat talking points and make a blanket statement as if one size fits all. It will be helpful for many small businesses for a multitude of reasons, others will get less benefit but how much they benefit depends on many factors. Stop repeating blanket talking points lol

Owners of S-corps are required to pay themselves a "reasonable” wage" that is a typical salary for what they do. They have guidelines and if you try to under pay yourself then you could end up in trouble. As it stands now all money salary and profit (pass through) is paid at the owners personal tax rate. So with the change, the salary would be paid and taxed at a personal tax rate while profit would be paid at the lower tax rate.

In other words, not all money is paid at the owners personal tax rate (as it is now) and with the change no all money would be paid at a corporate rate and that's the way it should be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2017, 03:12 PM
 
Location: Sector 001
15,946 posts, read 12,287,130 times
Reputation: 16109
As a single male making around $62500 I save $1600/year with the Trump plan. Not too shabby combined with already not paying a state income tax. No longer have to have those married couples brag about their $4k refunds from all their kids. Things are more balanced and fair now. Why should I have to pay for you to have sex?

People who work where I do also have a generous leave policy for kids... So much so I'm glad I dont work on a line with young men so I dont have to work overtime for months while theyre gone on leave.

So I get to keep $1600 more of my money rather than giving it to a lower income family with 4 kids who not only pays 0 taxes but gets money back... I can handle that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top